We hold these Truths as self-evident...
Please click and read the outstanding work of Stephen Lendman in Paid lying – what passes for major media journalism. Stephen documents major areas of propaganda. I also recommend the work of PuppetGov to artistically represent the fact of Americans being played by political “leadership” and their media whores. An example of their video work is below in powerful beauty (warning: some strong language).
In my work, to just consider one area of easily-demonstrated intentional lies of omission and commission, propaganda: I’ve previously documented the two principle fears some Americans espouse with Iran and threaten war to prove beyond doubt they are without basis in fact:
Please verify these two facts to your satisfaction. I’ve also documented that the US overthrew Iran’s democracy from 1953 until 1979; denied by the US government until 2000, but now conservative and unchallenged history. The US aided Iraq’s invasion of Iran from 1980 to 1988, supplying chemical and biological weapons to kill Iranians defending their nation, and US military attacked and destroyed Iranian oil platforms and a commercial airliner. I've also written the facts in a story as if the US were in Iran's position.
This is in addition that we now know from US Senate and House disclosed evidence that all claims to invade Iraq were known to be false at the time they were told. Another gem to consider is the Department of Defense acknowledges they routinely "lose" 25% of their budget. No, you say? Watch this CBS 3-minute report to verify.
Because “mainstream media” doesn’t scream these facts and reveal the US illegal Wars of Aggression, they are criminally complicit in covering-up crimes. They are propagandists of an oligarchic dictatorship; literally dictating what they want us to believe. This evidence verifies for all with intellectual integrity and moral courage that the US has been subject to Orwellian lies from a controlled corporate media.
Importantly, I’m just presenting facts that lead to the obvious conclusion of conspiratorial propaganda. Once we prove to your satisfaction that these enormous lies of omission and commission could not have occurred by accident and remain uncorrected for numerous years, that what is told us is pure and intentional propaganda, that means political “leadership” is doing something else that they don’t want us to understand. They then conspire to deceive. Or, as eminent Princeton philosopher Harry Frankfurt distinguished in his 2005 Bestseller as a strictly academic term, corporate media “reporting” is really bullsh**.
You're being played. Let that sink in. You are being treated as a dumb animal by both political party leaderships and the corporate media. You are being used for something, some agenda other than what they say.
Your political leaders and the corporate media are lying sacks of spin.
And this will continue to your children and on into the future unless we have a breakthrough in public recognition of propaganda and demand for truth. I advocate Truth and Reconciliation or prosecution.
As I previously wrote with documented manipulation of information:
Information Operations Roadmap is a program approved by Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld in 2003, and surprisingly released to George Washington University’s National Security Archive in a Freedom of Information Act request.[13] Wikipedia acknowledges its existence, but fails to inform of its content for government influence of American public opinion for support of US military operations. The existence of this document confirms governmental planning to replace fact with spin for the American public’s consumption.[14]
In 2000, CNN reluctantly acknowledged that they employ military PSYOPS (Psychological Operations Group) personnel at their news station.[15] The express purpose of US military PSYOPS is propaganda; to manipulate public opinion in favor of government military policy.
The Pentagon complied with Freedom of Information requests and released over 8,000 pages that confirmed beginning in January 2002, they recruited over 75 former military “experts” to be what they termed as their “surrogates” and “message force multiplies” to appear in major media to advocate for the War on Terror under the disguise of independent analysts.[16] They collectively appeared over 4,500 times to reinforce the government’s military positions while the media called them “military experts.”[17] The program was managed by the Assistant Secretary of Defense for Public Affairs, Victoria Clark, funded by our tax dollars, and again had the express purpose of propaganda. The title for this episode that stuck was “PSYOPS on steroids.” The Pentagon claims to have discontinued the program.
Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan confirmed that the Bush administration directly sent “talking points” to Fox News for their communication to the American public.[18]
Americans seem to be taking notice of at least some of this information. According to a poll by the Pew Research Center, the majority of the American public see the US major media news organizations as politically biased, inaccurate, and uncaring. Among those who use the Internet, two-thirds report that major media news do not care about the people they report on, 59% say the news is inaccurate, 64% see bias, and 53% summarize their view on major media news as, “failing to stand up for America.”[19]
A hypothesis to explain our government’s motivation to disinform the public in favor of Middle East wars that seems to be supported by the facts is to dominate the Middle East’s oil supply. Indeed, the Bush administration first named the Iraq war, “Operation Iraqi Liberation.”[20] Wikipedia used to have an article explaining that the project name was changed due to people wondering if its acronym, O.I.L., was the war’s real purpose. Regarding war with Iran, 90% of their oil and gas reserves are in the province that borders Iraq, most of which is right on the border, a tempting and nearby target should the control of oil be the objective.[21]
For those who cling to the notion that the purpose of the war was to remove a vicious dictator for the good of the Iraqi people and the safety of the world rather than for oil, consider that the US supports vicious dictators in Africa who cooperate with their oil exports to the US. The second and third largest oil producers of Africa are Angola and Gabon; neither belong to OPEC. In addition, Equatorial Guinea is a significant exporter of oil. All three countries have dictators at least as bad as Saddam. All three are on favorable terms with the US and were welcome to meet with President Bush.[22]
Also consider the CIA program, “Operation Mockingbird,”[23] disclosed to the public in the Church Senate Committee hearings in 1976, then reported in detail by Woodward and Bernstein in the Washington Post.[24] This was a fully implemented CIA program to spread disinformation throughout American media. CIA Director William Colby testified to the Church Committee that over 400 CIA agents were active in the US media to control what was reported through American mainstream television, newspapers, and magazines. President Ford fired Colby after his testimony, replacing him with George H. W. Bush. Bush Sr. ended the CIA’s testimony, stating that there were no other programs of concern to disclose and promising that the CIA would no longer influence the media.
An historical precedent of US government manipulation of the media that may have encouraged such a program was the successful cover-up of the destructive effects of the US use of nuclear weapons against Japan. After the US used the world’s most destructive WMD in history, General MacArthur closed southern Japan to reporters. The War Department hired NY Times Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist, William Laurence, to report to the American public on the accomplishment of the US nuclear weapons program. Part of Laurence’s instruction was to specifically state that nuclear weapons had no danger of radiation. Laurence did so, discounting Japanese reports of radiation fallout poisoning as “propaganda.” Laurence was rewarded for his “reporting” with a second Pulitzer.[25]
Please share this article with all you see or feel will benefit. If you appreciate my work, please subscribe by clicking under the article title (it’s free). Please use my archive of work to help build a brighter future.
[13] National Security Archive: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB177/index.htm , Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Information_Operations_Roadmap .
[14] Try these: The National Security Archive. Rumsfeld’s Roadmap to Propaganda. National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book #177: http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB177/index.htm , and BBC. Brookes, A. US Plans to “Fight the Net” Revealed. Jan. 27, 2006: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4655196.stm .
[15] CommonDreams.org. Cockburn, A. The military and CNN. March 23, 2000: http://www.commondreams.org/views/032300-107.htm .
[16] New York Times. Barstow, D. Behind TV analysts, Pentagon’s hidden hand. April 20, 2008: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/20/washington/20generals.html .
[17] Media Matters. Military analysts named by Times expose appeared or were quoted more than 4,500 times on broadcast nets, cables, NPR. May 13, 2008: http://mediamatters.org/items/200805130001 .
[18] Truthdig.com. Scott McClellan: White House fed “talking points” to Fox News. July 27, 2008. http://www.truthdig.com/avbooth/item/20080727_scott_mcclellan_white_house_fed_talking_points_to_fox_news/ .
[19] In From the Cold. And they wonder why we despise them. Aug. 10, 2007: http://formerspook.blogspot.com/2007/08/and-they-wonder-why-we-despise-them.html .
[20] White House Press Briefing of March 24, 2003: http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2003/03/20030324-4.html , Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Operation_Iraqi_Liberation&redirect=no
[21] For additional background: Westminster Committee on Iran. Iran After the NIE Report: Exploring the Issues, Exploding the Myths. Dec. 20, 2007: http://www.payvand.com/news/07/dec/1205.html and map of Iran’s Petroleum Facilities, 2004: http://www.lib.utexas.edu/maps/middle_east_and_asia/iran_petroleum_facilities_2004.jpg .
[22] There are many updated articles you can research. For foundation: Energy Bulletin. Beinart, P. Rigged. June 9, 2004: http://www.energybulletin.net/node/596 .
[23] What Really Happened. Mockingbird: The Subversion of the Free Press by the CIA: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/MOCK/mockingbird.html , Prison Planet. Louise, M. Operation Mockingbird: CIA Media Manipulation: http://www.prisonplanet.com/analysis_louise_01_03_03_mockingbird.html , Brandt, D. Journalism and the CIA: the Mighty Wurlitzer. April-June, 1997: http://www.freedomofthepress.net/journalismandtheciathemightywurlitzer.htm , Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird .
[24] Bernstein, C. The CIA and the Media. Oct. 20, 1977: http://carlbernstein.com/magazine_cia_and_media.php .
[25] Wanttoknow.info. Cover-up of Original Atomic Bomb Effects in New York Times Rings True Today: http://www.wanttoknow.info/atomicbombcoverup .
Comments
Great article with fantastic references. Good deal :)
Great article as always! Truth must be told.. Thank you Carl!
It is surprising, and gratifying that this well researched and supported article was printed. Kudos to Mr. Herman. Please don't stop reporting the corporate propaganda media machine. Articles on opposition to it would be greatly appreciated. Many of us are literally sick of it.
Excellent article. But American mass consciousness seems impervious to this grim reality. Even otherwise intelligent people bristle when the subject of Iran is raised...
Thank you, Mr. Herman, sir.
Quite a few of us have come to accept the weakStreamMedia for what it is. From schoolbooks, disney, tv, hollyweird, ragazines,"books"; All indoctrination from the MoneyMasters who seek to enslave us all. Ask anybody from the old Sovjiet, or if they have a brain-the new sovjiet(EU). Meet the new boss same as old boss:MoneyMasters.
Keep Digging,
Thank you for your posts and encouragement for people to look further and embrace the wider truths and context right in front of them.
I do think Pixar is a bright light of hope in symbolic communication to stand up for ourselves. A Bug's Life is a great analogy.
What garbage spin - virtually everything you list was first made public by that same mainstream media you criticize.
wow:
I guess you're right. Everyone knows that our wars are illegal Wars of Aggression, we're being lied to into a war with Iran, we all know trillions are going to banksters while a million children die every month when just 0.7% of GNI saves their lives, and DOD "loses" 25% of their budget every year.
Yup, you're right.
Americans know and are ok with that: the transfer of our American republic to a fascist slave society. Americans want their enslavement. That's what beats in our heart andminds' strongest calling.
Hey wow, have you thought about my invitation to contact Project Camelot and turn whistle blower to expose your part of PSYOPS? Or do you want to claim you're an ordinary 1% of the population who is a sociopath with no empathy to actually end the slaughter of your fellow human beings?
Who are you, wow?
Thank you Carl Herman for the truth.
Tell you waht, Carl - I will personally come and eat your hat IF this administration actually goes to war with Iran.
Even the Bushies didn't want to take that on, you may have noticed.
But as for the history of US interference in Iran, glad you're catching up - most of us were well aware of it at the time the Shah was ousted.
And no, not all the rationales given for invading Iraq were known to be false; the neo-cons refused to believe anything that contradicted their preconceptions. (There is a very significant difference that you may understand if you give it sufficient thought.)
Bottom line, you try to paint conspiracies where even the most casual observer can quickly see the problem is far more often incompetance and ignorance - making YOU much more of a propagandist than most media underpaid and overworked media types.
Wow:
Let’s keep focused: do you agree that the main points of war with Iran are disinformation as documented in the article? Yes or no and explain.
1. You know what the Bush admin really wanted? Oh, yeah, sure you do.
2. I’m catching up? Most were aware? Not from corporate media they’re not, which supports my point.
3. You’re wrong about evidence for invading Iraq. Read the documentation and tell me about the major claims and what we now know from the evidence. You’re repeating propaganda refuted by Senate and House disclosure of the actual evidence. I wonder where you get your info from? Mainstream media?
4. Incompetence and ignorance is destroyed as excuses. Read my article, “Are US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan well-intended mistakes? What we now know from the evidence” to verify that my information is correct. You disagree? Explain after reading the article.
Thank you Carl for the great work you are doing for humanity.
The stooges of the Enemy(MSM) are in full action on this comment list. some seam to have some level of sofistication like (wow).
THAT is a PROVE that you are hitting the nail.
KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.
Wow, thanks! Very informative.
IAEA says Iran is not in compliance. You misrepresent the 2007 NIE, turning 'not right now' into 'never.' You ignore Iran's long-standing and on-going support for terrorist groups and grossly over-simplify one of the most complex and conflicted societies in the region.
And you rant against the media, yet you use Sy Hersh as one of your primary sources!
As for the Bush intentions, I simply let their actions, or lack thereof, speak for themsleves.
"2. I’m catching up? Most were aware? Not from corporate media they’re not, which supports my point. "
Horse-puckey. The history of US involvement in Iran was one of the most heavily reported stories of 1979-1980 as the embassy hostage situation played out.
As for Iraq, what is proven evidence NOW is not the same as what was incontrovertible THEN. Yes, there was both CIA and DIA evidence that Iraq's WMD program was long dead - but for the Bushies who already "knew" that Iraq had WMDs, it was all too easy to dismiss....
to dismiss...
And AGAIN - while you whinge about the media, you ignore the excellent work being done at the time by the Knight Ridder Washington Bureau to call into question the rationales for war in Iraq - stories which ran in most K-R papers and were picked up by at least NPR and PBS before the war began.
On your final point, I've answered Iraq - and your rants simply conflate Afghanistan into the same box without any discussion of the differences between the two.
Of course, since you appear to be a '9/11 truther' from your other writings, any rational discussion of Afghanistan is probably wasted on you anyway.
It would seem that the kids of California are better off with you no longer mis-educating them.
6. Afghanistan’s evidence is also documented: Bush refused to provide any evidence of any crime of bin Laden and invaded. You blow that off, wow, when I document the evidence in the same manner I’ve done with my part in writing 200-300 briefs for members of Congress as a lobbyist for RESULTS in ending poverty in US domestic and foreign policy. Documentation doesn’t get much better than mine; anyone with academic and professional experience will recognize this.
7. Wow, my article, “Who are 9/11 Truthers? What is the 9/11 Truth Movement?” gives readers the strongest evidence from pro and counter-government sides. But again, I trust readers to move forward with their engagement in evidence, rather than ad hominem insults, distractions, and straw-man lies that you prefer.
8. Finally, for all: res ipsa loquitur, Latin that I translate as “The facts speak for themselves.”
5. Wow, you lying sack of spin! Read my article, “Are US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan well-intended mistakes? What we now know from the evidence” that shows our own government admission that all evidence for war with Iraq WAS KNOWN TO BE FALSE AT THE TIME IT WAS TOLD! You are lying or refuse to see the evidence in front of you. And this is the huge difference between your communication and mine. The evidence shows all claims were false; lies of omission and commission. And the documentation is right there for anyone who cares to see. Americans are ready to see the facts; you propagandize to distract from the key facts when lives are on the line. This is the big deal I advocate.
2. Sy Hersh is an interesting piece of testimonial evidence, and secondary to the documented lies of Wars of Aggression, War Crimes of torture, rendition, indefinite imprisonment, and absolute lies for more war with Iran. This should be ongoing focus of an independent media and all people interested in protecting and defending the US Constitution. Since your focus is elsewhere, readers should consider your allegiance.
3. Bush actions were to lie and then invade Afghanistan and Iraq, and then lie and move toward war with Iran. Yeah, I’ll let their criminal actions speak for themselves too.
4. I’ll let readers discern the extent “mainstream” media tells the key facts of current and threatened wars. The big stories should they report should be something like: “US commits Wars of Aggression!” “US tortures: guilty of War Crimes” “US lies for war with Iran, violates UN Charter” “US mass murders a million in Iraq from war lies” etc.
Wow:
Thank you for the opportunity for interested readers to discern a focus on facts from your distractions and refusal to discuss documented evidence. I trust readers to move forward appropriately.
1. You lie about what is right there in black and white in front of you. The 2007 NIE reported no evidence of threat, which is exactly what I wrote, not “never.” Iran’s alleged support of groups opposing Israel’s violent aggression against Palestinians is a whole other topic that distracts from the documented lies of the US regarding wars with Iraq, Afghanistan and more lying rhetoric with Iran.
Carl, you are no different than the Bushies - you start from an assumption (there was no reason for war in Afghanistan) and then selectively accept anything that supports your assumption while ignoring anything that contradicts it.
It requires an open mind to grasp the concept that someone can cling to a belief - and act on it - even as evidence to the contrary accumulates. Your belief system is little different from the extreme religious fundamentalists.
And you claim to have taught kids critical thinking?
But what's most laughable is your insistence that "the media" is engaged in some kind of overarching conspiracy to delude the public.
You've obviously never spent any time with reporters and editors - put any three together and they can't agree on where to go for lunch, much less work up a good conspiracy.
Journalists have many failings - but most of them have a much stronger grasp of reality than you.
wow:
All readers have to do is compare the evidence documented in this article and the links and compare this to what the five corporations that comprise the sheep-stream media present to us.
You reject discussion of documentation of what happened in Afghanistan and the rule of law, the most important one, of when war is and is not legal.
You damn yourself to live in a viciously antagonistic world until you demand rule under just laws and use your own critical thinking to focus on evidenciary claims rather than character defamation.
Your call.
Choose your future carefully; choices have consequences.
wow- Why argue about things you know nothing about? Do you really "think" the things going on in the world just randomly happen, when so many of these things are bad for most people? Read, learn, and re-write before posting!
Carl, I've seen more than enough evidence to have no doubts that al Qaeda was behind 9/11, that bin Laden knew, approved and funded it and that he paid the Taliban government of that time sizable amounts of money to provide him with safe haven.
That makes the takedown of the Taliban government and the effort to 'get' bin Laden and destroy al Qaeda legal under International Law and the UN Charter under both Article 51 and the Security Council Resolution of 9/12. Period.
The undeniable fact that the Bush administration mishandled the after-effects of removing the Taliban government doesn't change that. And the legality is maintained under International Law by the requests for military assistance from the subsequent Afghan government. (Its credibility and questionable domestic legitimacy are irrelevant as long as it is the accepted government under International Law - which it is.)
As for Iraq, I've opposed that war all along as unjustified and unnecessary - and based on a highly selective use of available intelligence.
But unlike you, with your conspiracy theories also built on highly selective use of information, I prefer to address the much more realistic problem that also is clearly supported by the actual evidence: the blind adherence to pre-existing beliefs in the face of conflicting evidence.
THAT is a much bigger problem in government policy making, and one that afflicts virtually all administrations to some degree.
Cont: The US involvement in subsequent Afghan government is beyond the scope of this article; there’s much to say about the legitimacy of the current government being democratic or a US-supported puppet, despite your declaration of their legality. As such, this topic is a distraction from consideration of the legality of US invasion.
For Iraq, you’ve twice directly in comments and more from the article content refused to address the evidence in my article, “Are US wars in Iraq and Afghanistan well-intended mistakes? What we now know from the evidence.” I agree pre-existing beliefs do blind people; research supports it. However, wow, in this case we have the actual evidence disclosed that was the basis of the claims. These lies are obvious to anyone who looks.
Wow: For the US invasion of Afghanistan to be legal under international law and the UN Charter, EVIDENCE of their government’s complicity in the 9/11 attack must be submitted. You must also refute as somehow irrelevant the Afghan government’s offer to arrest bin Laden upon US presentation of evidence of his involvement in any crime, 9/11 or otherwise, that the US refused. Document your evidence, please.
The US acted in violation of Security Council Resolution 1368 of September 12, 2001 by refusing the cooperative action demanded and the Council “seizing the matter” (taking the issue into their jurisdiction) by the US unilaterally attacking and invading Afghanistan. More:
YOU think they were lies - but you are being just as selective as the neo-cons in ignoring the complete picture and focusing only on the parts you can use to support your narrative.
What's absolutely clear when you look at ALL the evidence is that the Bush administration dismissed and refused to believe anything that contradicted their Iraq narrative - but that is not the same as lying. THEY BELIEVED THIS STUFF!
And you don't FIX the frakin' problem by misdiagnosing it - you just come across as a fanatic of the opposite stripe.
Cont: And that’s the bigger picture: are Americans willing to be responsible for the intellectual integrity using high school critical thinking skills to stop their own government’s Wars of Aggression? So far, no. Congress has not. Oath Keepers are leading what I see is our next best option: every man and woman in military, law enforcement, government to refuse and stop all unlawful acts and orders within their legal authority to do so.
So, wow: if you choose to respond, either read the article I cite of the evidence we know and address it or explain why you refuse to do so. If you don’t take one of those two paths then I imagine you’re choosing to surrender oversight of evidence from Congress to executive claims of “national security” – which by definition is dictatorship (following the dictates of the Fuhrer), or for whatever reason you just refuse to look at the hard evidence we have.
Cont: Presidents in the US are not allowed “secret evidence” to launch wars; Congress has complete oversight of the President under the US Constitution (should they ever choose to exercise this authority).
These are objective facts anyone can verify, wow: the major claims listed above were known to be false at the time they were told because there was no evidence to support them. The evidence cited and now disclosed falsify each claim.
Wow:
Other people must just play you like a fool if you think all people have to say to get out of a lie is that there’s secret evidence that made them believe what they were doing was proper.
You refuse to discuss the major claims made to support the war that we now know from the disclosed evidence were known to be lies: Saddam buying enriched uranium from Niger, ties with al Qaeda, aluminum tubes that could only be used for enriching fissionable material for nuclear weapons, and WMD that all 16 US intelligence agencies said they believe he had but posed no threat to US national security. Each of those claims, as my article walks readers through, is ridiculous lies made-up out of thin air because there is no evidence to support the claims. More…
wow- Please go to mideast and see with your own eyes, and LEARN something....
What frakin' planet are you on? WHERE have I claimed they had 'secret evidence?'
I repeat: the administration chose to BELIEVE only some of the evidence, that which supported what they already believed.
Just as YOU choose to BELIEVE they intentionally lied about everything because YOU ALREADY BELIEVED THEY WERE LYING TO BEGIN WITH.
If you were to put Cheney or Rumsfeld or Wolfowitz under pentathol, they'd probably tell you they STILL believed most of it.
THAT'S THE REAL PROBLEM, YOU DOLT!
And crazy? Been there, done that - was in Iraq when we accidentally blew up the chemical weapons at Khamisiyah in 1991, was in Afghanistan in late 2001 and early 2002. Said all along that if Iraq still had chem, it would be degraded and worthless by 2002.
Every outlet of the main steam media told us during the Olympics that Russia had attacked S. Ossetia. The people in S. Ossetia have digital cameras and the internet. Various blogs such as informationclearinghouse.info told the truth. Georgia had attacked S. Ossetia in the early AM, killed their fellow Russian Peace keeping troops, destroyed a hospital with tanks and drove 1000s across the border. Russia responded and drove the Georgians out. A typical joke was "Georgian rifle for sale, never used, dropped once”. A little history from Wikipedia:
On Sunday 12 November 2006, South Ossetians (mostly ethnic Ossetians) went to the polls to vote in a referendum regarding the region's independence from Georgia. The result was a "yes" to independence, with a turnout above 95% from those among the territory's 70,000 people who were eligible to vote at that time.[9] There was also a vote in favour of a new term for South Ossetia's president, Eduard Kokoity.
Except, of course, Comrade Kostel, main stream media like the NY TImes, Washington Post, NPR, PBS, BBC America, Reuters, McClatchy and a few dozen others consistently shown that BOTH Georgia and Russia launched attacks into South Ossetia within minutes of each other.
Next time, do a simple Nexis search before spewing your propaganda straight out of the Russian disinformation playbook.
May we assume you would have taken the side of the Rebels in the American Civil War as well?
Snark:
You’re really funny! You’re blasted with evidence of “mainstream” media disinformation and then you jump on their bandwagon as credible sources??? You point to another interesting and complex story; which requires a different article to get into. But I think your point is to distract readers’ attention from the topic of the article, snark. And given the seriousness of the topic, I retract my initial remark that’s funny.
Let me use smaller words, then Herman:
Kostel state main stream media say Russia attacked S. Ossetia.
Snark point out that Kostel is telling untruth; main stream media say BOTH Georgia and Russian attack at essentially same time.
Snark further point out that Kostel repeating Russian disinformation campaign.
Period.
Snark make NO statement re: reliability of main stream media - simply report WHAT THEY ACTUALLY REPORTED as opposed to lies Kostel tells.
Distraction????
Snark NOT the one who brought up the topic in the first place; simply pointed out falsehood.
Simple enough for you NOW?????
Snark: do you have anything to say about the article's content?
Yeah.... as I've said, it's full of factual errors and half-truths.
Too bad you don't have the courage of your convictions to allow the criticisms to stand - let allow the neo-nazi bigots free rein of your comments sections.
Then again, considering who actually OWNS examiner.com, maybe you're really just a pretend ultra-leftie helping your owner recruit the Jew-haters and militia nuts to his causes.
Got the guts to let THIS ONE stand, Herman?
Snark:
Please explain any factual errors and/or half-truths in the article.
You know, you can tell a lot about a person from the quality of criticism he/she gives. If you didn't have that small part of worthy response, I would have deleted it for the irrelevant and rude ad hominem attacks on the other people commenting.
The truth is terribly easy to find
"The Imam said that this regime occupying Jerusalem (een rezhim-e ishghalgar-e qods) must vanish from the page of time (bayad az safheh-ye ruzgar mahv shavad)."
Ahmadinejad was not making a threat, he was quoting a saying of Khomeini and urging that pro-Palestinian activists in Iran not give up hope-- that the occupation of Jerusalem was no more a continued inevitability than had been the hegemony of the Shah's government.
Whatever this quotation from a decades-old speech of Khomeini may have meant, Ahmadinejad did not say that "Israel must be wiped off the map" with the implication that phrase has of Nazi-style extermination of a people. He said that the occupation regime over Jerusalem must be erased from the page of time.
Presstitutes: AKA Media Talking Heads Selling America out for Money.
Another Awesome article
Got something to say?
Examiner.com is looking for writers, photographers, and videographers to join the fastest growing group of local insiders. If you are interested in growing your online rep apply to be an Examiner today!